Internal National Organization for Marriage (NOM) documents, which are part of an investigation regarding campaign finance activities by the state of Maine, have revealed an insidious plot to encourage Black and Latino voters to actively reject same sex marriage as a civil right.  These documents were brought to light by HRC (the Human Rights Campaign).

“The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks—two key Democratic constituencies. Find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage, develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots…”

Another passage:

“The Latino vote in America is a key swing vote, and will be so even more so in the future, both because of demographic growth and inherent uncertainty: Will the process of assimilation to the dominant Anglo culture lead Hispanics to abandon traditional family values? We must interrupt this process of assimilation by making support for marriage a key badge of Latino identity – a symbol of resistance to inappropriate assimilation.”

Oppressors have long played the game of divide and conquer to maintain their privilege.  For this plan to work, one must first ignore that there are Black and Latino GLBT people, and that by turning against them and refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of marriage equality, heterosexual cisgender people of color, would in effect be denying our own people their civil rights.  Heterosexism and racism are very different marginalizations, but they both work to actively oppress social minorities through the process of “othering” and institutionalized social inequality.  To agree that anyone deserves separate and unequal treatment before the law undermines our own struggles for racial equality, because it supports the idea that difference legitimizes actively oppressing a minority population.

I find it interesting that they seek to portray GLBT spokespeople as racist, because it further shows bias on the part of NOM.  There is no doubt that some members of the GLBT community have employed racist tactics to fight for marriage equality – specifically through repeated acts of appropriation,  but that does not make their cause any less just; it simply signifies someone determined to use the master’s tools to destroy the master’s house.

NOM is only interested in race when it can be used as a weapon to attack another historically marginalized group. The everyday microaggressions that all people of color have to negotiate are of no interest, because to care about that would mean a true acknowledgement of the horror that is White supremacy.  For NOM, racism is but a tool to achieve an end, rather than the soul crushing phenomenon that continues to lead to death, higher rates of incarceration, poverty, poor nutrition and health, as well as purposeful limited educational opportunities.  What is patently obvious from the statements of people like Alan Keyes, is that there will always be a segment of communities of color, who will be quick to jump on this opportunity believing that their bigotry somehow grants them power and a separation from the great unwashed masses.

  • FHC

    Just as the Vote and Affirmative Action duped subjugated citizens into thinking that they could achieve equal rights and opportunities through legislation; the delusional fallacy of ‘gay marriage’ is not a civil right. (“Gay”, for the purpose of this text, means male homosexuality.)
    Firstly, sexual preference is a choice; similar to liking chocolate, or disliking broccoli. And it’s scientifically incorrect as well as morally offensive to equate it with either race or gender. Since the only love which may be conceived as innate is maternal.
    Second; children, the very reason for marriage, are denied even the basic of human rights: to know and enjoy without severance the love of their birth mother, to have and to hold their genetic heritage, and to be nurtured and supported by a society that values domestic husbandry. Because, when properly supported, a mother’s love is the greatest love of all, and no amount of cross-dressing or political declaration will ever change this, only to degrade it. As it is imperative that patriarchal tyrannies deny and belittle a child’s right to its mother in order to pervert this original love, and transfer it to political and religious institutions which capitalize on the systematic oppression of women.
    Thirdly, without rehashing the egotistical divorce, deadbeat dads, and parental irresponsibility of today’s current family relations: Who exactly benefits from ‘gay marriage’? Be assured it’s not the children of low-income families. On the contrary, those struggling to maintain basic medical and dental plans, designed specifically to provide coverage for parents holding low paying jobs, these families will suffer when rates become unaffordable. Because even though maternity and pediatric care (excluding preemie medicine) are not responsible for the high cost of health care, the treatment for chronic illness perpetuated by sodomy, reckless dirty sex, and drug practices are exorbitantly expensive. Therefore, if high maintenance boyfriends become wives, once again it’s the tax payer who really gets it in the rear, as the health care costs of State employees will soar, and private sector premiums sent sky-rocketing.

    So beware young families and mothers, straight or lesbian, with whom you make your bed. If your family can afford to give $100,000 to a political campaign, then any increase in health insurance is outweighed by the protection it provides a spouse’s assets, basically at the expense of others. Yet if you’re a hardworking low maintenance couple, who doesn’t care to support indifferent men who raise your medical costs while adopting children even though they have no regard whatsoever for motherhood; before you sleep with these blatant male chauvinists pigs, “who are so attractive, intelligent, stylish, and gay…so incredibly perfect that they wouldn’t have sex with a woman if they were the last humans on earth,” you might care to think, at least, of the children.

    Because ‘matrimony’, derived from the word ‘matron’-a woman with child- is an oath of husbandry to children and their families; if there’s no woman then there is no marriage. Moreover, sodomy must never be taught or exposed to children as anything other than a perversion. Where, although appliances can be safely inserted into the anus in order to stimulate the prostate gland, one must question why a man would desire such stimulation; as it is unnatural. And as more studies correlate sodomy with degrading prostate and rectal health, it is therefore also unhealthy. How, and at what age is this explained to children, and by whom? Also, what precautions and parameters should, or can be put in place to prevent inappropriate exposure? If natural parents can have their children taking away for various abuses, what abuses will gay parents be guilty of; how will they be prosecuted, how many kids will suffer, and at what cost?

    To conclude, the Federal Government and sound churches, temples, and mosques; black, white, yellow, and brown are right on this one, ‘gay marriage’ is against the law, and for good reason. But lesbianism and polygamy are not; as any amount of people, a whole community, the entire world can venerate mother and child. So by maternal families recognizing the ulterior motives of gays, and denying them access to children, they could yet secure the blessings of Liberty to themselves and their prosperity.

More in LGBT rights
Close